From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50530C433E0 for ; Wed, 24 Jun 2020 22:49:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A3312065D for ; Wed, 24 Jun 2020 22:49:59 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1593038999; bh=+Xiia5lz5jMxPkcFiSIcy2n0z1B9hfXtGE0im/2wmaI=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:List-ID:From; b=sCaehP8mnev/TUkz8VWO0yZlyPFERciBjgdhn+2emVSeTLII2hMyrCUDdIMS+46m/ Y3PX0nNtX4gv+Wjx5VwXMQ+ybhAjEZms3KwQ5UpTUvjMb4ioHAjHBi4RLSyDBtsDLp p4S04CqrzTtC1sg6GIsqjBYAwRtKOjHjeonExN3E= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2389792AbgFXWtt (ORCPT ); Wed, 24 Jun 2020 18:49:49 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:42294 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2388711AbgFXWtt (ORCPT ); Wed, 24 Jun 2020 18:49:49 -0400 Received: from X1 (nat-ab2241.sltdut.senawave.net [162.218.216.4]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 45BE92065D; Wed, 24 Jun 2020 22:49:48 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1593038988; bh=+Xiia5lz5jMxPkcFiSIcy2n0z1B9hfXtGE0im/2wmaI=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=tyqEQyYnCLpAXNAjThece3itLPMPam/8cGEiE9U1sggON915fah27trGQB5tulRRK T33Ra4e4yfl3IjKj3fYmxzC/HvLZmbLCcMxk1pZ/pnGC0169/YA7zcuM8ptR3Vbiw7 JerXELY9gmukeBuv6Rfq9DEfEVIhgShZYKoJYXWY= Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2020 15:49:47 -0700 From: Andrew Morton To: HORIGUCHI =?UTF-8?B?TkFPWUE=?= (=?UTF-8?B?5aCA5Y+j44CA55u05Lmf?=) Cc: "nao.horiguchi@gmail.com" , "linux-mm@kvack.org" , "mhocko@kernel.org" , "mike.kravetz@oracle.com" , "osalvador@suse.de" , "tony.luck@intel.com" , "david@redhat.com" , "aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com" , "zeil@yandex-team.ru" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 00/15] HWPOISON: soft offline rework Message-Id: <20200624154947.2f41c426d4b83fb9241d8584@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20200624223618.GA13133@hori.linux.bs1.fc.nec.co.jp> References: <20200624150137.7052-1-nao.horiguchi@gmail.com> <20200624121742.711331a2a65633a0e16fd9e6@linux-foundation.org> <20200624223618.GA13133@hori.linux.bs1.fc.nec.co.jp> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.5.1 (GTK+ 2.24.32; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 24 Jun 2020 22:36:18 +0000 HORIGUCHI NAOYA(堀口　直也) wrote: > On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 12:17:42PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > > On Wed, 24 Jun 2020 15:01:22 +0000 nao.horiguchi@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > I rebased soft-offline rework patchset [1][2] onto the latest mmotm. The > > > rebasing required some non-trivial changes to adjust, but mainly that was > > > straightforward. I confirmed that the reported problem doesn't reproduce on > > > compaction after soft offline. For more precise description of the problem > > > and the motivation of this patchset, please see [2]. > > > > > > I think that the following two patches in v2 are better to be done with > > > separate work of hard-offline rework, so it's not included in this series. > > > > > > - mm,hwpoison: Take pages off the buddy when hard-offlining > > > - mm/hwpoison-inject: Rip off duplicated checks > > > > > > These two are not directly related to the reported problem, so they seems > > > not urgent. And the first one breaks num_poisoned_pages counting in some > > > testcases, and The second patch needs more consideration about commented point. > > > > > > > It would be nice to have some sort of overview of the patch series in > > this [0/n] email. > > > > > [1] v1: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/1541746035-13408-1-git-send-email-n-horiguchi@ah.jp.nec.com/ > > > [2] v2: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20191017142123.24245-1-osalvador@suse.de/ > > > > The above have such, but are they up to date? > > The description of the problem doesn't change, but there're some new patches > and some patches are postponed, so I should've added an overview of this series: > > - patch 1, 2 are cleanups. > - patch 3, 4, 5 change the precondition when calling memory_failure(). Previously > we sometimes call it with holding refcount of the target page and somtimes call > without holding it, and we passed a flag of whether refcount was taken out of > memory_failure(). It was confusing and caused code more complex than needed. > - patch 6-10 are cleanups. > - patch 11 introduces new logic to remove the error page from buddy allocator, > which is also applied to the path of soft-offling in-use pages in patch 12. > - patch 13 is basically a refactoring but I added some adjustment to make sure > that the freed page is surely sent back to buddy instead of being kept in pcplist, > which is based on discussion in v2. > - patch 14 fixes the inconsistency of return values between injection interfaces. > - patch 15 is a new patch to complement missing code found in code review for > previous version. > > Core change is in patch 11 and 12, and the others are kind of cleanup/refactoring. And all the other words in https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/1541746035-13408-1-git-send-email-n-horiguchi@ah.jp.nec.com/ are still accurate and complete?